• SUPPORT CATO
• FOR STUDENTS
• FOR MEDIA
• FREE NEWSLETTERS

• HOME

• ABOUT

• BLOG

• BOOKSTORE

• EVENTS

• EXPERTS

• MULTIMEDIA

• PUBLICATIONS

Books

Reviews & Journals

Public Filings

Policy Studies

Opinion & Commentary

• RESEARCH AREAS

• SPEAKERS BUREAU

• SUPPORT CATO

• CATO UNBOUND

• DOWNSIZING
  GOVERNMENT.ORG

• ELCATO.ORG

Cato Dispatch for September 26, 2007

Subscribe to the Cato Dispatch via email

(Links to outside sources were active as of the date of this dispatch; however, not all news sources maintain links to current stories indefinitely. Some links also may require registration.)

Supreme Court Weighs Use of Voter ID

"The Supreme Court said yesterday that it will consider whether state laws requiring voters to present photo identification at polling places unfairly discriminate against the poor and minorities, injecting the justices into a fiercely partisan battle just before the 2008 elections," reports The Washington Post. "At a time when polarization on the court -- many of its most recent high-profile decisions have been decided 5 to 4 -- has turned it into a target for political partisans, the justices are stepping into a political battle by accepting the voter-ID case."

In the Cato-at-Liberty blog post "Scant Evidence? That's Voter Fraud Calling," Jim Harper, Cato's director of information policy studies, writes:

"Voter fraud is the idea that individuals might vote multiple times, in multiple jurisdictions, or despite not being qualified. This is distinct from election fraud, which is corruption of broader voting or vote-counting processes. While voter fraud (and/or voter error) certainly happens, it is apparently on a trivial scale.

"Voter fraud has been used as an argument for subjecting our nation's citizens to a national ID. The Carter-Baker Commission found little evidence of voter fraud, but went ahead and called for adopting REAL ID as a voter identification card. One of the Commission's members apparently retreated from that conclusion, having learned more about REAL ID. For proponents of a national ID, if the phone's not ringing, that's voter fraud calling."

Hybrid Cars Don't Get Great Mileage

"Interested in an energy-efficient auto? You're in luck. That's because nearly every major car company has a hybrid line, or has plans to introduce one soon," reports ABC News. "Many of the market's hybrids -- cars which combine gasoline engines with battery-powered electric motors -- forsake fuel-efficiency in the name of power and performance. ... In fact, the fuel economy of many new hybrids is almost indistinguishable from that of their conventionally powered counterparts."

In "Escape from Automotive Reality," Patrick J. Michaels, Cato senior fellow in environmental studies, writes:

"Consumer Reports compared Toyota's hybrid Prius with its conventional Echo. Prius has been around (in Japan) since 1997, and Echo is an economized version. A base Echo sells for $10,525, and a Prius for $20,520. The difference in miles per gallon found by CR's drivers? Three miles per gallon (41 vs. 38).

"Is that all you get for your money? CR also tested the Honda's hybrid Insight, another $20,000 machine, and got 51mpg. It seats two and weighs 1820 lbs. Testers at Edmunds.com got the same, after over a year of ownership. Total U.S. sales in its 18-month history are a miserable 7,500 units. ... In fact, you can get much more mpg out of both conventional and hybrid cars if you try. When we look at this subset, Prius owners average around 45mpg and Insighters around 62 (mine shows 69.7). But this group is much more obsessive about mileage than, say, SUV owners."

House Votes to Expand SCHIP

"The House voted Tuesday to expand health insurance for children, but the Democratic-led victory may prove short-lived because the margin was too small to override President Bush's promised veto," reports the Associated Press. "Embarking on a health care debate likely to animate the 2008 elections, the House voted 265-159 to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, by $35 billion over five years. Bush says he will veto the bill due to its cost, its reliance on a tobacco tax increase and its potential for replacing private insurance with government grants."

In "Sink this SCHIP," Michael F. Cannon, Cato's director of health policy studies, writes:

"SCHIP is senseless. Like its much larger sibling, Medicaid, the program forces taxpayers to send their money to Washington so that Congress can send it back to state governments with strings attached. Both programs force taxpayers to subsidize people who don't need help, discourage low-income families from climbing the economic ladder -- and make private insurance more expensive for everyone else."

Jacob Grier, editor, jgrier@cato.org